Essay on Kevin Rudd's Apology Analysis

The Aborigines Protection Act 1909 (NSW) was a law that changed Indigenous Australian lives forever. The act enabled the New South Wales Board for the Protection of Aborigines to essentially control the lives of Aboriginal people. It was the Aborigines Protection Act 1909 (NSW) that had major provisions that resulted in the containment and suffering that Aboriginal people endured. This suffering included the practice of forcible removing Indigenous children from their families. These major provisions help us understand what the Aborigines Protection Act 1909 (NSW) involved and the impact it has had on the daily lives and cultures of Indigenous Australian peoples today.

When the girls do collapse onto the ground, Molly sees an eagle soaring in the sky above them. This eagle, as explained by Molly’s mother in opening scene, was a symbol of protection and safety in Aboriginal culture. The appearance of this eagle in their time of need emphasises how the Aboriginals are truly bonded, psychologically and physically, to their land and culture.

From the year eighteen sixty nine to the year nineteen sixty nine Aboriginal children were taken from their homes. The play ‘Stolen’ by Jane Harrison tells the story of five Aboriginal children who were forcibly extracted form their families. The children: Anne, Jimmy, Ruby, Sandy and Shirley all demonstrated the devastating impact that the removal from their families and subsequent institutionalisation had on each of their lives. Furthermore, some of the main characters maintained their hopes and dreams under different circumstances whilst a few displayed a lack of hope.

Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.

The language is quite simple, which represents the uncomplicated way Aboriginals lived their lives – by their own ways and tradition. Their tradition is evident through phrases such as “many grandparents ago,” and “old people warned us.” This shows cultural difference and respect for generational knowledge. By using words like “brought” and “new”, it’s obvious that the things the rabbits imported were causing damage, such as the pollution and illness. On the last page of the book, a rhetorical question, “Who will save us from the rabbits?” shows how overpowered and helpless the numbats

In the orientation of the film Blair uses techniques such as setting, this is an important technique as different settings can either show a rise of reduction of prejudice towards indigenous people. The film begins in the Australian outback, where the audience is first introduce to two characters Gail and Kay. The two girls are cousins and are running across the scene, they make up about 10% of the height of the screen. Blair uses long-shot contrasting their vulnerability. Establishment shots of the homes and buildings and also seen, we as the audience understand that the girls are relatively poor as there are many family member sharing minimal houses, they are living in close proximity to each other and live in a remote area. Already Blair has expressed the theme of prejudice by depicting the isolation indigenous people have with white communities. The aboriginal families seem to be living in a mission environment contrasting that they were disadvantaged from the European settlers. After seeing the earlier setting of the

These ideals were inevitably challenged when white society was confronted by people of mixed blood. The lack of conformity by the Aboriginal race to a white lifestyle was seen as a problem as was the growing number of ‘half castes’.[17] Some Australians found it offensive to see almost white children living amongst Aboriginal families.[18] As a solution to this problem, in 1937 the Federal Government adopted the Policy of Absorption as the future destiny of the Aboriginal people of Australia.[19] This decision was based on prevailing scientific and anthropological knowledge which suggested that Australian Aborigines were descended from the Caucasian race[20].

The assimilation program and federal law just caused mass amounts of problems not just now but for future generations to come. Many members of the Stolen Generation have a sense of loneliness, low self-esteem, loss of identity and mistrusting everyone and have also shown a much higher unemployment rate causing economic problems. The Stolen generation also has had an impact on Parliament as seen in the famous “I’m Sorry” speech by Kevin Rudd in 2007 and more recent apologies to the “White Stolen Generation”. The Stolen Generation has impacted Aboriginal Australian life drastically and Australian’s history and is often portrayed in the media and in movies such as Rabbit Proof Fence.

In this film, it also shows how important their loved ones are to them. Like when the three girls get taken away, they used their hands to bang against the window, showing their sadness of separation, and their connection of their love and wanting to be close with their family at every time possible, because every time they were together was a moment each treasured. Their grandmother felt the pain they were feeling, of desperation, frustration and powerlessness, and that is shown to us when she hits herself with a rock on her head to make her bleed. Also the howling sounds she makes shows the pain she feels and makes us feel her pain, too.

Assimilation policies existed in purpose of allowing the removal of Aboriginal children legal and believed as to be the right thing. The removal policy was managed by the Aborigines Protection Board. The Aborigines Protection Board was a government board established in 1909 with the power to remove children without parental consent and without a court order. These policies were especially detrimental to the Aborigines as a ‘government’ act prevented them with having authority over their own children and having no power in stopping the abducting of their children. Over causing a significant discrimination against the indigenous race, breeding hatred and inequality in Australian society, the implementation of these policies caused immense heartache and anguish for the Aboriginal parents for losing their children, the children of the Stolen Generation experiencing solitude and confusion for majority of their lives and the rest of society,

Authorities were able to remove Aboriginal children it was thought that through assimilation into the European communities would improve the lives of these children. Children were considered ‘easier’ to assimilate as they couldn’t just return home, in particular ‘half-caste’ children of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous heritage. Assimilation claimed to benefit the lives of Indigenous Australians, but it failed as white societies refused to accept Indigenous people as equals, despite being forced to live as white people. Although it is undeniable that stealing Indigenous children violated basic human rights and caused extreme trauma and suffering to individuals, families, and communities, however non-Indigenous Australians wanted to ‘breed-out’ Indigenous Australians,

By the 1950’s all state governments invoked a new policy called assimilation (1950’s – 1960’s), which aimed to eliminate Indigenous cultures, religion and languages. Assimilation was based on the belief that if living conditions were improved, Indigenous Australians were to be absorbed into White Australian society (Hampton & Toombs, Racism, colonisation/colonialism and impacts on indigenous people, 2013). After the failure of the assimilation policy, governments aimed their sights towards Integration (1960’s - 1980’s). Integration was a step towards

‘Rabbit Proof Fence’ was the story of a 3 young Aboriginal girls who were taken from their homes because they were ‘half castes’ and then their long walk home following the rabbit proof fence. The idea of the government taking children from their homes and placing them into the care of white people in the hope of them losing their cultural beliefs was stronger. This idea of them being changed was evident with quotes such as “This is your new home. We don't use that jabber here. You speak English” providing the idea of whites being dominant through their values.

The recent Australian film, Rabbit Proof Fence, similarly condemns the social, political and cultural mores of colonial and post-colonial Australia in relation to its past treatment of indigenous Australians. Like To Kill a Mockingbird, it too, is set in the 1930’s and reflects similar attitudes and values whites have to black people. The film is a true story based on the book by Doris Pilkington Garimara, the daughter of one of the half-caste children in the film who, together with two other Aboriginal girls, was forcibly removed from her family in Jigalong, Western Australia. These children form part of what is now known as the “Stolen Generation”. They, like many others who lived in the first part of the 20th century, were the victims of the official government assimilationist policy which decreed that half-caste children should be taken from their families and their land in order to be made “white”. The policy was definitely aimed at “breeding out” Aboriginality, because only half and quarter caste children were taken.

64, Commonwealth of Australia 2011). Policy then moved towards more assimilationist strategies in which attempts were made to convert Aboriginal Australians into ‘responsible citizens’ (Gilbert 2005, Haebich 2000). The protectionist and assimilationist policies share the core values that Aboriginal culture is inferior and on its way to an ‘evolutionary end’ (Gilbert 2005, p. 64).